Share This Page

Braddock man charged with raping girl, 12; then hospitalized after fight

A Braddock man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl was hospitalized in critical condition after a friend of the victim's family shot him during a fight in the Hill District, police said.

Pittsburgh police charged Warren Lovell Keith, 35, with rape, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and other crimes in the sexual assault of a Hill District girl on Wednesday and the fight on Thursday.

He told the girl that if she said anything he would "cut everyone you love in pieces" and then forced her to kneel on the floor and pray with him after the assault, a police complaint said.

The girl told her mother what happened, and she reported the incident to police.

The Tribune-Review does not identify victims of sexual crimes. Her mother is not being identified in order to protect the girl.

The girl and her mother returned to the Hill District home with a friend, David Saunders, according to police. After Saunders went into the home, the woman heard a loud bang and Saunders emerged and said, "I think I shot him," the complaint said.

Keith attacked Saunders with a hammer, according to the complaint, and police found the two men lying near Webster Avenue and Morgan Street.

Saunders was in stable condition at UPMC Mercy in Uptown, and Keith was hospitalized at UPMC Presbyterian in Oakland, the complaint said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.